AFNI Message Board

Dear AFNI users-

We are very pleased to announce that the new AFNI Message Board framework is up! Please join us at:

https://discuss.afni.nimh.nih.gov

Existing user accounts have been migrated, so returning users can login by requesting a password reset. New users can create accounts, as well, through a standard account creation process. Please note that these setup emails might initially go to spam folders (esp. for NIH users!), so please check those locations in the beginning.

The current Message Board discussion threads have been migrated to the new framework. The current Message Board will remain visible, but read-only, for a little while.

Sincerely, AFNI HQ

History of AFNI updates  

|
January 15, 2014 01:36AM
Hi Daniel. In my experience, the effect is often small, but it varies from person to person. Usually, the standard deviation goes down slightly (look in the graph window) and a few obvious false positive voxels go away (though maybe not as much as I'd like), despite there being not much change in the power spectrum in the subjects I checked long ago. You can subtract the before and after datasets with 3dcalc to see what actually changed. I wonder if it's a matter of the Fourier series fit not working very well with noisy data, compared to GLM. I wasn't able to find an error in the math in 3dretroicor, but if someone else does I'd like to hear about it.

Anyways, here's the first thing to check: plot your pulse/resp data along with the pulse/resp phase output from 3dretroicor. The pulse/resp phase should reflect the cycles of the pulse/resp data. If not, you probably need to do some transformation of the pulse/resp data, and/or select an appropriate threshold for the pulse data (it defaults to 1). I usually use the scanner's pulse gating output so I don't need to deal with the pulse raw data. Also, note that the pulse/resp data file should span the same period of time as the EPI dataset (e.g. 300 seconds of EPI requires 300 seconds of pulse/resp data at whatever sampling rate you can manage).

Another thing I think would limit the effectiveness of 3dretroicor is the removal of slice times, e.g. after slice timing correction, usually to time 0 or TR/2. Consider that a 2-second TR would include around 2.5 heart beats, and I doubt any interpolation will make all the slices appear to come from the same cardiac phase (although it may not be so bad with respiration). I would run 3dretroicor very early in preprocessing, before slice timing correction.

If you can isolate a bug, let us know. I do still use 3dretroicor due to its convenience. I don't have time to improve 3dretroicor, but bugs are another matter. Also consider using RetroTS.m to generate physiological regressors, including additional regressors beyond those used in 3dretroicor. Or do both!
Subject Author Posted

3dretroicro appears to little very little...

danielcuneo January 14, 2014 08:45PM

Re: 3dretroicro appears to little very little...

Fred January 15, 2014 01:36AM

Re: 3dretroicro appears to little very little...

danielcuneo January 15, 2014 05:34PM